View Single Post
Old 03-27-2011, 01:49 AM   #23 (permalink)
Frank Lee
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,762

Blue - '93 Ford Tempo
Last 3: 27.29 mpg (US)

F150 - '94 Ford F150 XLT 4x4
90 day: 18.5 mpg (US)

Sport Coupe - '92 Ford Tempo GL
Last 3: 69.62 mpg (US)

ShWing! - '82 honda gold wing Interstate
90 day: 33.65 mpg (US)

Moon Unit - '98 Mercury Sable LX Wagon
90 day: 21.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,585
Thanked 3,555 Times in 2,218 Posts
^Good, forgot about things like that! I know the trend in racing has been to downsize rod bearing diameters, I don't know about mains too but for the rods at least they claim a noticeable friction reduction. I'd think diameter reduction to be more effective than width reduction but of course more expensive to accomplish.

The valve spring idea is good too, if you know it'll not ever get run into the valve float zone. Realistically valve springs return all the energy it took to compress 'em minus internal spring friction and system rotating friction... so the return may be minimal... but if it hurts nothing and costs nothing why not go for it.

I'd go on a campaign to reduce engine driven accessories too.
__________________


  Reply With Quote